Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Gail Brown KARR, etc., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. BRANT LAKE CAMP, INC., Defendant-Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered August 7, 1998, denying defendant's motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered October 30, 1998, which denied defendant's motion for a stay of trial pending appeal, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.
The infant plaintiff was injured during a baseball game, organized for 11-year-old boys, when an adult counselor, playing in the position of catcher threw the ball “hard” at plaintiff. Plaintiff was unable to handle the ball, which struck him in the face. Summary judgment on the basis of an assumption of risk was properly denied.
Voluntary participants in a sporting activity assume the risks to which their roles expose them but not risks that are “unreasonably increased” (Benitez v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 73 N.Y.2d 650, 658, 543 N.Y.S.2d 29, 541 N.E.2d 29). Thus, notwithstanding a player's assumption of the risks inherent in playing any sport, school districts, athletic councils and other organizers of children's sporting activities remain under a duty “to exercise ordinary reasonable care” to protect the infant participants “from ․ unreasonably increased risks” (id.). In the case at bar, an issue of fact is raised as to whether the active participation of an adult, physically larger and more skillful, enhanced the risks associated with the sport as played by 11-year-old boys (see, Mauner v. Feinstein, 213 A.D.2d 383, 623 N.Y.S.2d 326).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 27, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)